CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS – HEALTH
Jan. 27, 2012 – 9:42 p.m.
Children’s Hospital Training Bill Held Up in Senate as Two Seek Changes
By Melissa Attias and Emily Ethridge, CQ Staff Writers
A Democratic senator and a Republican senator are separately seeking changes to a reauthorization of a medical training program at children’s hospitals that has stalled despite receiving strong bipartisan support in both chambers.
With the release of President Obama’s fiscal 2013 budget request approaching, supporters are pushing for quick action on the Children’s Hospitals Graduate Medical Education Payment Program, which saw its most recent reauthorization (PL 109-307) expire Sept. 30. The president is expected to send his budget to Congress on Feb. 13, and the program’s advocates are anxious to see whether he will propose zeroing out its funding, as he did last year.
A bill (
Both Democratic Sen.
Whitehouse sought to insert his provision during the Senate committee’s markup, but he withdrew his proposal to accommodate an agreement to advance the bill without amendments, with the understanding that he would resume his push for the expansion. He said Jan. 23 that “conversations are ongoing” about the measure.
“I’d like to have it included in the bill,” said Whitehouse, whose office estimates that the provision would make three children’s psychiatric hospitals eligible for the program, including one in his home state of Rhode Island. “I think that would be the best way.”
But his effort is opposed by a Republican cosponsor of the measure, who said he could not support expanding the program’s scope.
“I agreed to work for the reauthorization provided that we didn’t expand or extend the commitment financially that was already made,” Sen.
Casey said Jan. 27 that he has been working with Democratic and Republican senators to find a compromise. “The care of our children is too important for disagreements to hold up the reauthorization of this program indefinitely,” he said.
Ways to Move Forward
Created in 1999, the medical training program supported 56 children’s hospitals in fiscal 2010 that were responsible for training roughly 5,800 residents.
While the program has enjoyed strong bipartisan support, it has also been a frequent target for budget cuts, in part because there is little data on how well the payments work. Obama suggested that the training could be funded through sources such as Medicaid when he proposed zeroing out its funding last year, and President George W. Bush proposed eliminating the program in his fiscal 2009 budget proposal. Both times, lawmakers saved the funding.
After the reauthorization expired in September, congressional appropriators continued the program’s funding through the end of fiscal 2012 in an omnibus spending measure (PL 112-74). But in the absence of Senate floor action on a reauthorization, advocates are concerned about the potential repercussions.
Children’s Hospital Training Bill Held Up in Senate as Two Seek Changes
“You don’t have to be authorized to be appropriated,” said Jim Kaufman, vice president of public policy for the Children’s Hospital Association, formerly known as the National Association of Children’s Hospitals. “However, the concern in this fiscal environment is it puts this program at great risk.”
If the Senate agrees to incorporate Whitehouse’s psychiatric hospital language, it is unclear whether the addition would be welcomed in the House. When asked if the amendment could also find opposition across the Capitol, Isakson said, “Could be, could be. I take it one problem at a time.”
A spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which approved the House reauthorization in July, said panel members are hopeful that the Senate will pass the House language. “If not, once the Senate acts, we can work through any differences to reauthorize this important program that saves children’s lives,” she said.
Rep.
Whether or not the change is included, program advocates say their focus is on moving the reauthorization forward.
“Our bottom line is, this has got to be reauthorized with bipartisan support,” Kaufman said. “We’re not opposed to that amendment, as long as the sponsors and the senators can work out their differences.”
Niels Lesniewski contributed to this story.